All not lost for refugees seeking dignity through work in Hong Kong

The recent Court of Final Appeal judgment denying refugees and other claimants seeking protection a constitutional right to work beggars belief and common sense.

The case concerned four individuals who have been accepted by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and the government as bona fide claimants.

All four have effectively been stranded in Hong Kong for a prolonged period - up to 12 years. They are not economic migrants and, at the beginning of the judicial review process, had not been given permission to work here.

However, during the fourth year of the process (when the case was at the Court of Final Appeal stage), three of the applicants were granted permission to work by the Director of Immigration. This discretion is exercised after an individual application, and a review of the personal circumstances of each case, but it does not constitute a right to work.

The granting of permission to work depends strongly on whether the applicant is, or is likely to be, suffering as a result of "inhuman or degrading treatment" from the denial to work.

It was extremely disappointing that the court judgment failed to support the right to work for the claimants contained in various provisions, including in the Hong Kong Bill of Rights and the Basic Law, but instead has upheld the current practice of official discretion that allows the Immigration Department to evade its responsibilities in this regard.